From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Andy Wingo Newsgroups: gmane.lisp.guile.devel Subject: Re: emacs, guile, and the manual Date: Sat, 31 Jul 2010 13:12:22 +0200 Message-ID: References: <8739v3ed1q.fsf@ossau.uklinux.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1280574582 22055 80.91.229.12 (31 Jul 2010 11:09:42 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 31 Jul 2010 11:09:42 +0000 (UTC) Cc: jao@gnu.org, guile-devel To: Neil Jerram Original-X-From: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Jul 31 13:09:41 2010 Return-path: Envelope-to: guile-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Of9wi-000357-La for guile-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 31 Jul 2010 13:09:40 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:60184 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Of9wh-00015F-W7 for guile-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 31 Jul 2010 07:09:40 -0400 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=50470 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Of9wc-00014P-PG for guile-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 31 Jul 2010 07:09:35 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Of9wb-0007eF-JG for guile-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 31 Jul 2010 07:09:34 -0400 Original-Received: from a-pb-sasl-quonix.pobox.com ([208.72.237.25]:45785 helo=sasl.smtp.pobox.com) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Of9wb-0007dh-HX; Sat, 31 Jul 2010 07:09:33 -0400 Original-Received: from sasl.smtp.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by a-pb-sasl-quonix.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B0C9FC9D76; Sat, 31 Jul 2010 07:09:31 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=k+VkoCMBp8bkquofEn4To+gR/OU=; b=hVwRRf 7Tq//+ASDiCQAIUiAmo/FLveiXYdgJaz6rI7VGRP/UY7OBSR0GZ9VL2ZQhXt/oPU dVByNju2BpKgL47n/GqCb78zllXRaND7VLZUuH4JbjETgtTC5/YExiPsh/Q+fre1 uegiQ5ApjDfw+RyDQ7d6ivlOlH0NSpOPnLvZA= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; q=dns; s=sasl; b=C11pZEJTvGZOY0zGLFvJVTNffIYHMtnF jqqk+kFyBb7hv/4V2H+eU9e1L7To4oVyTTw5fbDloHqi8cXkAGb3T9ZVO4Wx2Yzm knfDecxRNLUtcz8giAng9tuiaiaaqv98odKO4qSskNE4fISILh4dyLu03mY0vz45 mFsc/cwXelo= Original-Received: from a-pb-sasl-quonix. (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by a-pb-sasl-quonix.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 800E3C9D73; Sat, 31 Jul 2010 07:09:29 -0400 (EDT) Original-Received: from unquote.localdomain (unknown [88.17.204.243]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by a-pb-sasl-quonix.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id C12BDC9D71; Sat, 31 Jul 2010 07:09:26 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: <8739v3ed1q.fsf@ossau.uklinux.net> (Neil Jerram's message of "Wed, 28 Jul 2010 18:22:57 +0100") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.2 (gnu/linux) X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 16BC4D8C-9C94-11DF-BEF2-9056EE7EF46B-02397024!a-pb-sasl-quonix.pobox.com X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Solaris 10 (beta) X-BeenThere: guile-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Developers list for Guile, the GNU extensibility library" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.lisp.guile.devel:10747 Archived-At: Hi Neil, On Wed 28 Jul 2010 19:22, Neil Jerram writes: > Right now GDS doesn't work, so I think we have to discount it. If it > was ever resurrected, the doc (to the extent still appropriate) could of > course be resurrected too, from Git. OK. As far as the debugger goes, I will use the docs that are there as a guide to the features that I still need to implement (breakpoints and stepping). > When debugging integration is (at some future time) included, I think > the application<->debugger channel will need to be more complex than a > normal REPL - for example, so that there is a way for the application to > tell the debugger when a breakpoint has been hit (on some thread other > than the TCP port thread). Hmmm. Good point. Threads are complicated. Thanks for your thoughts, Andy -- http://wingolog.org/